COLUMNIST: Lavrov on Russia, Britain and World War II

Many people will be aware from its coverage in the Western media of the statements by Medvedev earlier this year from an article in Izvestia repudiating the “totalitarian” Soviet Union. He said that Stalin had committed unforgivable crimes regardless of any progress made by the Soviet Union under his rule. He refused to allow Stalin’s portraits to be displayed in the Victory Day parade. He even said, “We ourselves allowed history to be falsified”. (Although that last sentence is pretty ambiguous when you think about it.)

Why then has there been no coverage of a contrasting point of view expressed by Medvedev’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov before the Victory Day parade? In fact, by searching for this article which I read quotations from, I came across a website which is really best ignored…except that it speaks volumes about what the largely ex-KGB/FSB members of the current Russian government really think, or at least want others to think.

“New Eastern Outlook” declares itself to be “an international intellectual discussion and networking platform” unusually free from any political point of view. However it turns out to be based in Moscow and its long list of contributors are mainly Russian, some declared to be working for the government. When you start to read the articles you realise that many of them are hard-core anti-Western propaganda ranging from alleging that the US invasion of Afghanistan was undertaken to allow it to profit from opium, to latest news that a US/Israeli alliance is currently engaged in a massive military mobilisation to wage war on Iran. In other words, like Russia Today without the news items that make it look like an ordinary online newspaper..

In the colomn in question, Lavrov makes it clear that he, like Putin, is a hardliner when it comes to Soviet history and will not stand for softening of the Soviet version of events beyond admitting the facts that are most obviously out of the bag. Like his falsifying predecessors, he accuses the honest of “falsifying history.” But even without knowing all of the stories put out by the Soviets I wonder if even they went as far as accusing Britain of being largely responsible for World War II.

He writes: “Without the Munich agreement, little of what followed would have occurred.” Then he writes: “Historical revisionism has been used to attempt to link August 23 and September 1, 1939 – the conclusion of the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Pact and Germany’s attack on Poland.” In other words, Lavrov believes that Stalin’s accord with Hitler had nothing to do with causing World War II, and specifically nothing to do with Germany’s attack on Poland. According to him, Britain must shoulder the blame.

But it is beyond dispute is that the representatives of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany signed that pact with secret protocols in which they drew a line on a map of eastern Europe dividing it into their respective spheres of influence. What happened subsequently made it clear that this line was nothing less than the proposed demarcation line between the empires of two brutal dictatorships (irrespective of the sincerity of the two parties signing it). No such division of territory occurred between Britain and Germany.

Next, Lavrov criticizes Britain and France for waging a “phony war” against Hitler when the two countries (unlike the USSR) were desperately under-equipped for full-scale conflict and when Russia was providing large-scale raw material supplies to Germany to allow it to withstand a British naval blockade. And what would the brave British sailors who later helped Russia in the Arctic convoys have thought if they had known that Stalin had previously provided the German navy with an arctic port? Britain did not, of course, provide aid and comfort to Nazi Germany as Stalin’s Russia did.

Finally, Lavrov writes: “There are frequent attempts to exploit World War II, and questions are raised regarding the causes of this global catastrophe for selfish purposes.” Yet he makes no attempt to even acknowledge, much less criticize, any such attempts on the Russian side. Instead, he chooses to issue nothing more than a propaganda tract condemning the West’s failure to appreciate Russian heroism as it saved the West from the horror of Nazism single-handed. Conversely, he makes no attempt to acknowledge any role the West may have played in staving off the Nazi scourge.

In jaw-dropping fashion, Lavrov states: “During World War II Russia—once again—fulfilled its historic mission of saving Europe from forced unification and its own folly.” So in other words, when Russia carved up Eastern Europe into a Russian slave empire at the close of the war, after seeking to do the same in a pact with Hitler before the war began, Russia was not engaged in naked aggression and imperialism but was actually saving Europe from itself!

The Nazi-Soviet Pact was one of the darkest chapters in the inglorious history of the Soviet Union and modern Russia cannot aspire to be a civilised country until its leadership admits the full terrible facts of it as we know them without seeking to deflect and mitigate that blame with neo-Soviet attacks on other countries. But instead, Lavrov’s article has fully restored our worst fears about their intentions to continue their denials revisionism and false accusations.

25 responses to “COLUMNIST: Lavrov on Russia, Britain and World War II”

Last time I got a reply by LR saying that USSR is equally to blame for the war and has deserved the German invasion and I was shocked, how can someone talk about a genocide against Jews and Slavs in such a way. USSR was mostly taking a defensive role because it knew that it wasn’t ready for a war and that Germany was too strong, but a future war with Germany was inevitable, so the USSR decided to sign a peace treaty to help it buy more time to prepare in a future war against fascism, while at the same time occupying some of the former Russian empire lands.

Yes, this is was a Soviet occupation, but things don’t happen just at random and you have too look at the whole picture, Britain and France allowed Germany to occupy Austria and Tzeskoslovakia. USSR withstood something that it truly didn’t deserve in my opinion, 26 million dead as a result of a barbaric invasion by a former a great civilized european nation, that’s the irony. And it’s not fair that today I have to live, bearing in mind how many of my relatives could have been alive today. My grand-grandmother herself only managed to save 4 children out of around 10 she had. At some point the Germans wanted to kill the whole family for suspisions on collaborating with partisans, and by sheer determination, they managed to surviwe.

Why shouldn’t Stalin’s crimes and role in unleashing WWII be equated to those of Hitler’s? In 1939, the U.S.S.R. had seven neighbors to the West: Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania. She unleashed aggressive actions against six of them, all but Norway, that is. As a result, three of these six countries were completely annexed, one lost about 20 % of her territory, one about 30 % and one about 40 %. On the occupied territories, Stalin’s regime committed unspeakable atrocities, if not Holocaust, then definitely genocide and other terrible crimes against humanity. So, how is that different from what Hitler’s regime did?

If Hitler’s attacks against Denmark, Norway and Poland are universally condemned, and rightly so, why shouldn’t the same apply to Stalin’s attacks against Finland, Estonia and the same Poland? What’s the difference.

And how do Hitler’s Holocaust and genocide justify Stalin’s gulags, genocide, and crimes against these captive nations? I look at the “whole picture” as you advised, and I don’t see the answer.

What utter rubbish, there was no such thing as holocaust or genocide in the Soviet ideology, everyone suspected to pose a threat was eliminated. Gulags were not a genocide, unless you consider christinans as a seperate group of people. The Soviet Union, and here is the key thing, never had a policy of ethnic cleansing and genocides, it killed millions, and most of those were it’s own citizens, and now you are equating the regime to fascism, what are we getting to there?

Stalinism killed millions of people, fascism killed millions, but Stalinism was political and class elimination and reclaiming old Russian lands, and fascism was ethnic elimination with the policy of world domination, judge them accordingly please.

Never had a policy of ethnic cleansing? Really? No ethnic cleansing? What do you call deportations of the ENTIRE Chechen nation, ENTIRE Crimean Tartar nation, etc, etc., regardless of class or political views.

Now, also about killing its “own citizens” (as if it were better). Well, if Stalin occupied the Baltics and Eastern Poland and killed and deported hundreds of thousands of Balts, Ukrainians or Poles, do you consider this killing its “own citizens?” I guess, he made them his own citizens first…

@Gulags were not a genocide, unless you consider christinans as a seperate group of people.

Damn. I already knew you’re just a Russian Typical Retard (RTR), but this was especially stupid.

It was stupid because you thought only “christinans” (presumably you meant Christians) were targeted (which probably means exactly all Chechens were either deported or killed for being “christinans”), and it was stupid because you think there can’t be a genocide against a religious group, or even you don’t consider a religious group “a seperate group of people.”

So let’s say it’s a day of kindness for the Russian retards (“Russian patriots”), and I’ll tell you what this whole genocide thingy is:

The law protects four groups – national, ethnical, racial or religious groups.

A religious group is a set of individuals whose identity is defined by common religious creeds, beliefs, doctrines, practices, or rituals.

Some other genocide trivia you probably didn’t know (because of being a RTR):

Genocidal acts need not kill or cause the death of members of a group. Causing serious bodily or mental harm, prevention of births and transfer of children are acts of genocide when committed as part of a policy to destroy a group’s existence.

Intent is different from motive. Whatever may be the motive for the crime (land expropriation, national security, territorrial integrity, etc.), if the perpetrators commit acts intended to destroy a group, even part of a group, it is genocide.

The phrase “in whole or in part” is important. Perpetrators need not intend to destroy the entire group. Destruction of only part of a group (such as its educated members, or members living in one region) is also genocide. Most authorities require intent to destroy a substantial number of group members – mass murder. But an individual criminal may be guilty of genocide even if he kills only one person, so long as he knew he was participating in a larger plan to destroy the group.

@In 1939, the U.S.S.R. had seven neighbors to the West: Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania. She unleashed aggressive actions against six of them, all but Norway, that is.

And thus made a direct border with Germany (which was planned). The same border which Germany used to invade the USSR in 1941, and driving right up to Moscow. (Using the war supplies and training provided by the Soviets earlier.)

Russia killed and deported Finns from Karelia, Poles from eastern Poland, Chechens, Ingush, Crimean Tartars, Georgian Muslims (in fact they were intending to deport all Georgians at one stage, but there were just too many of them), and a whole host of other ethnic groups including Volga Germans and Pontic Greeks.

Russia has a long history of genocide against ethnic minorities, and this carried on through the Soviet period.

As for “reclaiming old Russian lands”, what if the people living there (the native population) have no desire to live under Russian barbarism?

The uncivilized pagan barbarians in the kremlin have been exterminating UKRAINIANS – for centuries.

June 22. 1944 Stalin’s Secret document No. 078/42, over the signatures of NKVD chief Beria, Marshal Zhukov and Federov proposes exile to Siberia of “all Ukrainians who had lived under the German occupation”. Since all Ukraine was under German occupation this effectively meant every Ukrainian could be exiled except those who had escaped to Russia in 1941. Krushchev in his Secret Speech condemned Stalin for this decree.

Russia joined WW II on 17.9.1939 by invading Poland from the east (as an ally of Nazi-Germany).
Then it continued by invading Finland on 30.11.1939…..but this WinterWar proved to be a big mistake and costed the lives of 125 000 soviet-soldiers. Still, gospodin Lavrov and others are explaining (and believing!), that for the Soviet-Union WW II started only in june 1941. What a huge falsification!

2 Paavo… Not “Russia” but “USSR”. Or use “soviets” instead.
===
On 17.9.39 there were no any “Poland” as a country, anymore (just a kind of no man’s territory). Therefore there were no any “WWII” connection as there were no any war. Moreover, 30.9.38 Poland asked Berlin for their permission to cut a piece from Czechoslovakia, bearing in mind possible beckup from USSR and declaring that Poland will figh together with Germany “sholder-to-sholder”. And they got positive reply from Berlin… So what does it mean ? Using your kind of logic, since that time Poland was in ally with Germany !
===
Re Finland…this “failed war” resulted that all the initial/primary targets of USSR were… achieved ! But if before Winter War, Finland was offered with a huge territory on exchange basis (vs smal piece of land – to secure Leningrad from north).

Sorry if some proven hystorical facts doesn’t suit you… Communists&stalinists were real bustards and I hate them much. But do not try to cover own falsification by pointing the same done by others. Because…you are the same layer as Lavrov, but he simply does his job and nothing else ))) Or you too ?

@On 17.9.39 there were no any “Poland” as a country, anymore (just a kind of no man’s territory).

Interesting. Did you deduct it from some Polish government announcement I’m not aware of?

And what were the Polish army, border guard, police and militia forces doing there in “a kind of no man’s territory”? No man’s land is by definition a territory which is not occupied by neither side.

Could you please explain how thousands of Soviet soldiers who were killed and injured during the operation, and who were the hundreds of thousands of soldiers, police officers etc. they captured in “a kind of no man’s territory”?

@Moreover, 30.9.38 Poland asked Berlin for their permission to cut a piece from Czechoslovakia,

No, Poland didn’t “ask Berlin”, but demanded it from Prague.

And the Czechs also didn’t “ask Berlin” (nor Warsaw) when they seized this “piece from Czechoslovakia” in first place at the height of the Polish-Soviet War in 1920, just as the Red Army approached Warsaw. (But maybe they too thought: “in the summer of 1920 there were no any “Poland” as a country, anymore (just a kind of no man’s territory)”, or something.)

@bearing in mind possible beckup from USSR and declaring that Poland will figh together with Germany “sholder-to-sholder”. And they got positive reply from Berlin…

There was no such declaration whatsoever, and of course no “positive reply from Berlin”.

There was a “positive reply” from Prague, though. The Czechs decided to not resist anyone: neither Germans, nor Hungarians, nor Poles, nor even their own Ukrainian and Slovakian separatists.

They also had practically no resistance until literally very last days of the war. Actually the supposedly German-puppet Slovaks had much, much more resistance activity (including the great Slovak army mutiny in 1944 aka the Slovak National Uprising). The so-called “Prague Uprising” was a puny tragicomedy affair, from the rescue by the Vlasov army (of all people), to how they first capitulated but only days later proceeded to brutally murder German civilians when they had the Red Army backing and suddenly felt powerful against the defenseless people: http://www.radio.cz/en/article/127639

In the summer of 1945 the Czech “patriots” (mostly former collaborators) systematically murdered tens of thousands of Sudetenland Germans and deported millions more.

And the Vlasov’s Russians who rescued their so-called “uprising” (Czech police changing sides in the very last days of the war) from total disaster were almost all executed or deported to concentration camps by the Soviets.

Not “Russia” but “USSR”. Or use “soviets” instead. Communists&stalinists

Blame anybody – except the savage uncivilized pagan barbarians in the kremlin. Blame the Georgians, Ukrainians, Jews, etc…….. – but NEVER blame the savage uncivilized pagan barbarians in the kremlin.

I doubt the Russian state (as opposed to individual Russians) is capable of doing anything in good faith if the absolutely appalling history of Russian government is anything to go by.

I suggest you look at the articles lauding real Russian patriots who struggle against the tide of Russian state despotism to try and turn Russia into a civilized state that respects the rights of its own and other countries citizens, people such as Politkovskaya, Markelov, Estimirova (wow, all dead killed by Putinite thugs such as yourself….), or the brave people at Memorial (who had decades of research into soviet crimes against humanity seized by FSB thugs and destroyed) or the heroes of the democracy movement, or the heroes of antifas, who struggle at great personal risk to make Russia a civilized state rather than the barbarous, imperialist police state that it is.

There is, to be honest, very little difference between the Nazi’s and the Communists, except that the kremlin killed more innocent people – a lot more in fact.

Maybe if Russia provided a good example (which would be a first) by refusing to shelter or glorify communist war criminals, and refrained from threatening moves, speeches, and actions, it’s neighbors might not feel so threatened.

On 30.11.39 there surely was any “Finland” as a souvereign country (and not a no man’s territory, like Hitler and Stalin thought). By the way, the Germans did not help Finland and as RAN-academic Tsubarjan shows in his new research (2008), the german ambassador in Moscow was very pleased in winter 1939, that the Soviet-Union fulfilled the Molotow-Ribbentrop-Pact on the finnish border also in practise…..

One question: When you are celebrating “Djen Pobedyi” do you remember those poor soviet-fellows, who died in the Winter War? The amount of casualties was 125 000…. (poor sons and fathers who died, because of a lunatic “generalissimus”).

And, tell me, why o why, you still believe that WW II started only in June 1941?

And for Oleg, in addition (what Robert said): @In 1939, the U.S.S.R. had seven neighbors to the West: Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania. She unleashed aggressive actions against six of them, all but Norway, that is.

For the Soviet-Union WW II started on 17.9.1939 and not in June 1941! That is a just a plain fact, even for Oleg.

Atually Russian Liberation Army was “Peoples of Russia” (as in: Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia) as it was multi-ethnic (like the various Cossacks and what not) and just Russian-dominated.

Even Kaminsky’s Russian National Liberation Army formation had a plenty of Belarusians and such. Not to mention his own ethnic background (German-Polish, Russified).

Heck, even the Ukrainian National Army had some… Georgians in their ranks.

Of course almost all of them were (former) Soviets, mostly ex-Red Army.

In one case two German soldiers surrendered in Normandy. Turned out they were TIBETIANS who were originally forcibly conscripted by the Soviets. More than 1,000 other former Red Army were also captured during Overlord.

NOTICE: This blog quotes from source material, and links to it. When a post contains quotes and original material, the quotes are in ordinary print and the original in boldface. See "About LR" in the title bar for copyright notice.

Supporting La Russophobe

La Russophobe does not solicit or accept financial support from any source. If you would like to show your support for LR and your opposition to the rise of dictatorship in Russia, the easiest way is to create a Digg or StumbleUpon or Delicious account and use it to favorite some of our posts. LR also welcomes your e-mail comments and submissions for publication, and we urge you to support the effort to boycott of the Sochi Olympics.